Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #38

[mrjitty]

Just to note, forensics and DNA evidence is circumstantial evidence.

 

[Lyall0814]

I'm not finding it available to watch. Always better to hear from his mouth and understand the real context (other as "nothing" more or as no additional in relation to what they said they have - material evidence?).

It's 49 mins into this version of MWT's programme

 

[mrjitty]

AFAIU, it is the court, not the defence counsel or the prosecutor, which decides which witnesses to call. The judges will be leading the examination of witnesses.

The court will have the evidence in the case files submitted before the trial.
Certainly it will prioritise witness testimony over prior statements. But it won’t necessarily summon the star witnesses proffered by FF or HCW. It all comes down to the evidence which will be in the court’s possession by that stage. Jmo.

What is interesting is how the actus reus of murder will actually be proved without forensics.

Typically in a no body case it is inferred from other facts. e.g the victim was suddenly gone, and since then there has been no sign of life, and possibly there are forensics (e.g blood stains) or other circumstantial evidence (e.g. evidence the suspect was planning disposal of a body)

 

[Mex]

There are many, many witnesses that we know about circa 2007- and equally there may be many who have made themselves known to the police since then and about whom we know nothing.

Over the years there have been many appeals for information led by MM's parents. We don't know what information has been received as a result.

The prime example of a present day "Eureka!" moment is the publicity which led to HB recognising the frightening similarity between the rapist and the aggravated rape she endured and that suffered by DM. CB was convicted of the latter and indicted for the former.

Publicity surrounding police appeals for information regarding CB may have jogged memories. And that stranger in the background of holiday photographs might take on a new significance despite the resultant appearance change of teeth straightening and jaw alignment carried out on CB shortly after MM disappeared.

Back in 2007 CB was on no-one's radar. That situation is radically different now and who can tell what recognition and information might have been prompted as a result.

To find out we shall just have to wait patiently to find out what the wording of the charge sheet against CB will be.
My opinion

 

[Denis R Tandib]

There are many, many witnesses that we know about circa 2007- and equally there may be many who have made themselves known to the police since then and about whom we know nothing.

Over the years there have been many appeals for information led by MM's parents. We don't know what information has been received as a result.

The prime example of a present day "Eureka!" moment is the publicity which led to HB recognising the frightening similarity between the rapist and the aggravated rape she endured and that suffered by DM. CB was convicted of the latter and indicted for the former.

Publicity surrounding police appeals for information regarding CB may have jogged memories. And that stranger in the background of holiday photographs might take on a new significance despite the resultant appearance change of teeth straightening and jaw alignment carried out on CB shortly after MM disappeared.

Back in 2007 CB was on no-one's radar. That situation is radically different now and who can tell what recognition and information might have been prompted as a result.

To find out we shall just have to wait patiently to find out what the wording of the charge sheet against CB will be.
My opinion

BIB, in relation to MM I think it’s more likely we will be forever wondering what the evidence is behind the - as you say - Eureka moment.

 

[Okapi]

I'm not finding it available to watch. Always better to hear from his mouth and understand the real context (other as "nothing" more or as no additional in relation to what they said they have - material evidence?).

Agree. Also from that media link:

‘The public prosecutors’ office told the programme “not all our evidence has been made public.”’

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Agree. Also from that media link:

‘The public prosecutors’ office told the programme “not all our evidence has been made public.”’

The quotes from MWT’s video (above) were clear and from it we can be certain there is no physical evidence that MM is dead.

No matter what other evidence they have, I don’t see how it could be strong enough to convict CB. How can it be proven BARD that she is even dead, let alone murdered by CB.

Additional web chats, phone records from 3 May 2007, personal writings, witness statements etc. all qualify as material evidence in this context. Even if they have more of this evidence, it doesn’t change how unlikely it would be to get a guilty verdict?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Some of you will understand this already but for those who don’t, it may be helpful in understanding the lack of a charge against CB for MM’s murder.

I have looked at no-body murder cases on the internet. There is a guy called Tom DiBiase or his pseudonym “The No-Body Guy” who has done a lot of research on it. They have a higher conviction rate in the US 86% vs 70% than murders with a body but this is largely to do with the strength of the evidence, which must be overwhelming, that supports these successful cases - they need to be a no-brainer in order for the accused to be indicted.

According to him, prosecutors work on three areas to obtain a conviction:

1. By far the most important is forensic evidence e.g. blood stains, hair, teeth etc. other signs that someone has come to serious harm. He also includes digital evidence in this area like phone records, ping data, web browsing/search history etc. Based on the convictions he has covered, this must be very strong evidence like blood stains showing death is inevitable and google searches for “ ten ways to dispose of a body if you need to.”

2. Confessions to friends.

3. Confessions to police.

In the MM case, we know there is no body and no forensic evidence to prove death. We also know that CB has not and likely will not confess.

So we are left with HCW’s assertions which are likely based on one or more confessions from CB’s friends - criminal friends.

Prosecutors in Germany must prove actus reus and mens rea, the same as in the US.

I can’t see how CB will be charged for MM’s murder.

https://www.nobodycases.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Nobodytablelatest-Nov-2020.pdf

 

[mrjitty]

Some of you will understand this already but for those who don’t, it may be helpful in understanding the lack of a charge against CB for MM’s murder.

I have looked at no-body murder cases on the internet. There is a guy called Tom DiBiase or his pseudonym “The No-Body Guy” who has done a lot of research on it. They have a higher conviction rate in the US 86% vs 70% than murders with a body but this is largely to do with the strength of the evidence, which must be overwhelming, that supports these successful cases - they need to be a no-brainer in order for the accused to be indicted.

According to him, prosecutors work on three areas to obtain a conviction:

1. By far the most important is forensic evidence e.g. blood stains, hair, teeth etc. other signs that someone has come to serious harm. He also includes digital evidence in this area like phone records, ping data, web browsing/search history etc. Based on the convictions he has covered, this must be very strong evidence like blood stains showing death is inevitable and google searches for “ ten ways to dispose of a body if you need to.”

2. Confessions to friends.

3. Confessions to police.

In the MM case, we know there is no body and no forensic evidence to prove death. We also know that CB has not and likely will not confess.

So we are left with HCW’s assertions which are likely based on one or more confessions from CB’s friends - criminal friends.

Prosecutors in Germany must prove actus reus and mens rea, the same as in the US.

I can’t see how CB will be charged for MM’s murder.

https://www.nobodycases.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Nobodytablelatest-Nov-2020.pdf

This is what I have been wondering as well

The Morphew case (which collapsed) is an example of a no-body no forensic case which was based on digital evidence. i.e the victim disappeared 'digitally' about 18 hours before the suspect claimed she went missing. There was a tight web of corroborating digital evidence suggestive of the suspect cleaning up and disposing of evidence.

The key idea was that the time of "digital death" was when the victim and suspect were alone for many hours, so ruled out alternate explanations/theories.

I wonder what HCW has in this case, that supports the murder inference, rules out alternate theories, and ties in CB directly?

Or is that the digital/physical evidence he seeks?

 

[Mex]

The quotes from MWT’s video (above) were clear and from it we can be certain there is no physical evidence that MM is dead.

No matter what other evidence they have, I don’t see how it could be strong enough to convict CB. How can it be proven BARD that she is even dead, let alone murdered by CB.

Additional web chats, phone records from 3 May 2007, personal writings, witness statements etc. all qualify as material evidence in this context. Even if they have more of this evidence, it doesn’t change how unlikely it would be to get a guilty verdict?

The evidence against CB was sufficient to make him the prime suspect in MM's disappearance.

Subsequently the German investigators regraded that to prime suspect in the murder of MM.

It is an impossibility for anyone who doesn't have access to the evidence gathered prior to the knowledge of CB's existence and following on from public appeals, to base any sort of meaningful assessment using an unknown quantity.

 

[Mex]

Some of you will understand this already but for those who don’t, it may be helpful in understanding the lack of a charge against CB for MM’s murder.

I have looked at no-body murder cases on the internet. There is a guy called Tom DiBiase or his pseudonym “The No-Body Guy” who has done a lot of research on it. They have a higher conviction rate in the US 86% vs 70% than murders with a body but this is largely to do with the strength of the evidence, which must be overwhelming, that supports these successful cases - they need to be a no-brainer in order for the accused to be indicted.

According to him, prosecutors work on three areas to obtain a conviction:

1. By far the most important is forensic evidence e.g. blood stains, hair, teeth etc. other signs that someone has come to serious harm. He also includes digital evidence in this area like phone records, ping data, web browsing/search history etc. Based on the convictions he has covered, this must be very strong evidence like blood stains showing death is inevitable and google searches for “ ten ways to dispose of a body if you need to.”

2. Confessions to friends.

3. Confessions to police.

In the MM case, we know there is no body and no forensic evidence to prove death. We also know that CB has not and likely will not confess.

So we are left with HCW’s assertions which are likely based on one or more confessions from CB’s friends - criminal friends.

Prosecutors in Germany must prove actus reus and mens rea, the same as in the US.

I can’t see how CB will be charged for MM’s murder.

https://www.nobodycases.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Nobodytablelatest-Nov-2020.pdf

I can't see why CB won't eventually face charges in relation to MM. But I am content to wait until the police investigation has been concluded before rushing to judgement based not on solid information but on personal opinion.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The evidence against CB was sufficient to make him the prime suspect in MM's disappearance.

Subsequently the German investigators regraded that to prime suspect in the murder of MM.

It is an impossibility for anyone who doesn't have access to the evidence gathered prior to the knowledge of CB's existence and following on from public appeals, to base any sort of meaningful assessment using an unknown quantity.

There was sufficient evidence to make the McCanns suspects but it was insufficient to charge them.

Contrary to your assertion, we know for certain that the prosecutor has no forensic evidence nor a body.

There wasn’t enough evidence to charge CB before the appeal or the appeal would have been unnecessary.

Based on these facts, it is straightforward to foresee that the likely outcome of this investigation will be the same as the prior ones but we shall see.

 

[Mex]

This is what I have been wondering as well

The Morphew case (which collapsed) is an example of a no-body no forensic case which was based on digital evidence. i.e the victim disappeared 'digitally' about 18 hours before the suspect claimed she went missing. There was a tight web of corroborating digital evidence suggestive of the suspect cleaning up and disposing of evidence.

The key idea was that the time of "digital death" was when the victim and suspect were alone for many hours, so ruled out alternate explanations/theories.

I wonder what HCW has in this case, that supports the murder inference, rules out alternate theories, and ties in CB directly?

Or is that the digital/physical evidence he seeks?

It is interesting to keep abreast of other no body cases but without losing sight of the role cast for himself by CB which initially raised his friends' suspicions that he was involved in MM's disappearance..

I'm quite keen on learning how these witness reports were translated into evidence which investigators from the PJ - SY - BKA used to make CB their prime suspect.

In the interim it is worth bearing in mind that investigators are still actively working on this case.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

This is what I have been wondering as well

The Morphew case (which collapsed) is an example of a no-body no forensic case which was based on digital evidence. i.e the victim disappeared 'digitally' about 18 hours before the suspect claimed she went missing. There was a tight web of corroborating digital evidence suggestive of the suspect cleaning up and disposing of evidence.

The key idea was that the time of "digital death" was when the victim and suspect were alone for many hours, so ruled out alternate explanations/theories.

I wonder what HCW has in this case, that supports the murder inference, rules out alternate theories, and ties in CB directly?

Or is that the digital/physical evidence he seeks?

The No-Body Guy talks about this too. The digital trail we leave nowadays is compelling evidence when it disappears.

As I see it, the problem with the MM case is that it happened slightly before the smart phone revolution so people weren’t documenting their lives online and MM was obviously too young to have developed a digital identity and activity.

Given the characters in this case and the location, I think we would only be looking at phone calls text messages, email and browsing history from the perpetrators.

It’s hard to see how they would get anything more than they have from old phones, cameras or PCs from the box factory.

 

[Mex]

There was sufficient evidence to make the McCanns suspects but it was insufficient to charge them.

Contrary to your assertion, we know for certain that the prosecutor has no forensic evidence nor a body.

There wasn’t enough evidence to charge CB before the appeal or the appeal would have been unnecessary.

Based on these facts, it is straightforward to foresee that the likely outcome of this investigation will be the same as the prior ones but we shall see.

One remains totally mystified by this apparent obsession relating to MM's parents on this thread which is dedicated to the new kid on the block who is CB.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I can't see why CB won't eventually face charges in relation to MM. But I am content to wait until the police investigation has been concluded before rushing to judgement based not on solid information but on personal opinion.

But mine is not personal opinion. I provided a cite covering 542 no-body cases and the essential components required to obtain a conviction in these cases. We can be certain from public statements that the prosecutors case does not meet these standards.

I don’t mind you refuting points I make but please do so based on some real factual information as opposed to your subjective opinion.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

One remains totally mystified by this apparent obsession relating to MM's parents on this thread which is dedicated to the new kid on the block who is CB.

Given it is the same victim, it is the easiest and most relevant comparison to make. Despite your repeated assertions of the vast yet unknown evidence against CB, this comparison shows that the views of investigators can be incomplete and/or wrong.

I see no reason why it should be any different with this suspect based on the available information which renders useless any secret evidence the prosecutors may have - no body, nor forensics… IMO, no chance.

 

[mrjitty]

There was sufficient evidence to make the McCanns suspects but it was insufficient to charge them.

Contrary to your assertion, we know for certain that the prosecutor has no forensic evidence nor a body.

There wasn’t enough evidence to charge CB before the appeal or the appeal would have been unnecessary.

Based on these facts, it is straightforward to foresee that the likely outcome of this investigation will be the same as the prior ones but we shall see.

While we can't know what evidence they have, I think if we reach next summer without charges, it would be hard to believe the investigation is on track. I am already quite sceptical after 3 years.

Especially one wonders what actually they can be working on. The reservoir search apparently comes from a recent tip off. This suggests they are still waiting for a breakthrough in the case.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

While we can't know what evidence they have, I think if we reach next summer without charges, it would be hard to believe the investigation is on track. I am already quite sceptical after 3 years.

Especially one wonders what actually they can be working on. The reservoir search apparently comes from a recent tip off. This suggests they are still waiting for a breakthrough in the case.

I agree. HCW was talking about a two month investigation after the appeal so the time factor shows that things are not going to plan.

A breakthrough will only ever solve it IMO. Investigations lasting 12 years with OG, 10 years with the PJ and now 6+ with the BKA and not a charge from any of them.

Until someone finds the grave site and evidence of how MM got there, all we’ll have is incomplete investigations and former suspects.

 

[RichardKimble]

The evidence against CB was sufficient to make him the prime suspect in MM's disappearance.

Subsequently the German investigators regraded that to prime suspect in the murder of MM.

It is an impossibility for anyone who doesn't have access to the evidence gathered prior to the knowledge of CB's existence and following on from public appeals, to base any sort of meaningful assessment using an unknown quantity.

That is your opinion of which of course you are entitled to, which in reality cannot be backed up with evidence which the BKA may have, others are forwarding examples of why despite CB being a suspect the BKA haven't progressed to charging CB, that argument at the moment is winning out imo least of all there is no indictment to counter it.